The problem that I have with dogmas, and the idea of commandments, is that they are antithetical to enlightenment, in that they do not encourage/espouse self-control, but rather doing what you’re told.

Such religious, and even secular, commandments are means of controlling a populace that cannot seemingly control itself. The whole idea of enlightenment is self-awareness and actualization, a part of which is the idea that one should not need to be controlled, but should be in control of him/herself. And so the idea of the Buddha making a commandment such as “thou shalt not kill” seems inconsistent with the truth of the teachings of enlightenment.

My understanding of this is that there has been a separation between the/a “Buddha” and “Buddhism”, or put another way, between Buddhist philosophy and Buddhist religion.

Organized religion has always seemed to me to be all about control and manipulation—getting people to do what is “right,” not because it is right, but because of fear and greed. Again, it’s the same way one controls a child—by manipulating him with his own fears and desires.

.

From my personal notes, 7/16/00

Ah, I think we are on to something here.

I read somewhere that Jesus advocated turning the other cheek in the “ideal” situation, but that he advocated other methods if one is not in such an ideal situation.

In a very real sense, if the enlightened—who will naturally lean towards non-violence—allow themselves to all be killed off by the unenlightened, then, at the end of the day, there will only be unenlightened people around, and no one to help them become more enlightened and learn to not need violence the way they think they do as unenlightened beings.

Does this mean that I advocate violence? I’m not sure, really, but I will tell say this much: If I had a daughter, say, and someone was going to kill her unless I killed them, I would kill them in a heartbeat. Does that make it right? I do not know, nor would I care in such a situation.

The point here is that I think that it is unwise, and perhaps even a bit unproductive, to lay down a commandment such as “it is wrong to kill,” because that is not that simple. Of course, maybe a truly enlightened person would not look at the death of my child as such a bad thing, because it is the way of the world, but I think that this is an incorrect understanding of enlightenment and “acceptance of reality.” It is one thing to accept reality and not be deluded by illusion, but it is quite another thing to accept as good and right actions that are controlled by illusion. If those who pursue and see the truth of enlightenment look at “samsara”—and those things that cause it—as essentially “wrong” and “bad,” then the actions that result from samsara cannot be seen as “good” or “right.” Otherwise, there would be no reason to try and help people escape the cycle of samsara, right?

I think what this points out is that it is extremely difficult—and fraught with problems—to declare an absolute moral tenet, for morality itself is relative and in the realm of illusion.

The interesting point to consider is whether it is right or wrong to try to apply enlightened ideology to an unenlightened situation or society.

It’s the same sort of issue of whether it would be wise to go out into a raging battle in a war without armor or protection, and try to reason with the combatants about the evils of war. That doesn’t seem very wise to me. You would get killed pretty quickly, and if you did have wisdom to share with the world, it sure wouldn’t be shared anymore.

.

From my personal notes, 7/16/00

I do not think I believe in sacrifice, at least in the way it is commonly understood, for anything that could be called a sacrifice can be seen another way—not as a sacrifice, but as the way things are. It becomes an issue of attitude, how it is seen and judged.

I also do not believe in the idea of sacrifice as a demonstration of obeisance or subordination (to a “god,” for just one example), as that is all about manipulation and power over others—a dis-respectable trait in anyone, including leaders and parental figures.

And, so, I suppose I do not believe in the idea of sacrifice, for any instance of sacrifice is, I think, really just a case of wrong attitude, weakness, hubris, or ignorance, and, as such, should not be revered or respected, but criticized for the fraud that it is.

Along these lines, I suppose that one of the reasons I have a problem with this idea of Jesus dying for everyone’s sins is that I do not believe in the idea of “sin.” And so the problem is not any shortcoming on my part, but rather the sophism and misguided nature of the story itself. It is as fallacious as pontificating about how soldiers in Vietnam “died for our freedom.” It is simply a crock, a lie, and the reality is that they died for the brutish, selfish, and misguided ideologies of weak and blind men in power; just like Jesus, in fact.

.

From my personal notes, 7/16/00

I think the best thing we can do for people, for anyone, is to love them. It is such a simple yet profound truth, that I am somewhat overwhelmed when I even think about it, but it is just so, so true.

What loving people really means, though, entails understanding what love really is, what loving people really constitutes, and this cannot be accomplished until we each individually accept that the self, the ego, is an illusion, and that no matter how much we do for other people, it is not about ‘me.’ This is one of the most subtle, yet profound, things a person must grasp in order to really start walking the path of enlightenment.

The problem is that the ego is a wily trickster, and people often delude themselves into thinking they understand and accept the truth of the self and the ego, and yet when it comes down to it, the enormity of the illusions of their conditioned existences pops up again and again, getting in the way of real acceptance and real progress. This is the difference between knowing the path and walking the path. The difference is much more difficult, and fraught with obstacles, than most people think.

I say this from my own experience. The more I understand and accept, the more I see that there are changes in my life, and things I need to do, or stop doing, that I am not yet ready to do, even though I know that they are hindering my progress. But what I have done is to accept the truth of the truth that who I think I am is not who I really am, and that in discovering who I really am lies all the answers to every question I have ever had, lies true and real happiness.

But the trick is that it takes practice, it takes time, and patience, and real courage. It takes dealing with things and emotions that are not usually present in our normal daily lives; those things that come up and surprise us when we feel lonely, or are sad, or are reminded of something that we may have denied or repressed. One must first understand and accept the truth of the truth, and then—and this is key—one must actively live it.

Again, the great thing about all this is that truth is truth, and everyone has the answers within themselves. Since everyone wants the same things in life, when I say that most people do not understand what love really is, and that it is necessary for them to do so, and to live real love, I know that it is not up to me to tell them what real love is, definitionally. Rather, I know that everyone, deep down, already knows what love really is, and that it is something they need to allow themselves to realize and admit to themselves.

This is the absolute fucking beauty of this process. It’s so beautiful that I am still blinded by its beauty, and overwhelmed by its enormity. But the more I move forward on the path, the more manageable it gets, the easier it gets to accept it and do it.

.

From my personal notes, 7/17/00

While it is true that the human experience in war can sometimes be profound and extraordinary, war itself is inane, horribly childish, brutish, and cowardly of those who instigate it and hope to gain from it.

While people may act nobly in war, war it not noble, not at all. War deserves no respect, no veneration, and neither do those who believe in it as a way of solving anything or building anything, whether it be nations or characters.

The ultimate truth is this: All war is antithetical to real human progress and growth.

.

From my personal notes, 7/13/00

For example, the way —— was with certain men she had encounters with. The things she did may seem selfless and “for him,” but they were really all about her, they were for her, to feel in control, to feel power, to feel attractive, or wanted; all of which speaks to a craving or need in her. It may be “for” him, but it all about (and thus ultimately for) her, which is what actually makes it selfish.

Now, the situation is more complex when we look at —— and her mother. What —— did by helping her mother was obviously very selfless and out of an immense love. But what that kind of selflessness did in her was to make her focused more on herself outside of that situation. Because she was so occupied with selfless work when it came to taking care of her mother, and the lack of attention to herself (to her ego) through that work, it left a craving to get it outside of that situation, which is why when —— was not helping her mother, she was always so self-involved.

It is another example of the importance of how something is done rather than what is done. For while selfless acts end up being done, they are done by a person who does not really know how to do selfless acts selflessly, for they do not understand the truth of the self and ego they mistake for who they are.

Adherents of pragmatism do not see a problem with this because they have the attitude that a good deed is a good deed, and it does not matter the motivation behind it, just that it is done. The problem with it is that while —— might be doing selfless acts out of love when it comes to her mother, the fact that she is, in reality, incapable of doing selfless acts selflessly (because she is still so controlled by her ego, by its needs and cravings), which means that when she is out in the world, she acts selfishly and does not really love other people, because, as I have always joked, “it’s all about ——.” This is not good for ——, and it’s not good for those around her, and ultimately, it’s not even good for her mother.

This is why motivation matters, because as many “good deeds” are done regardless of the motivation, as many deeds will be done that are in-line with the motivation. And not only that, but the supposed good deed will not triumph over the long-term.

.

From my personal notes, 7/12/00

It seems to me that, more often than not, the reasons why one person falls in love with another person are more about him/herself than the other person.

I think that this speaks, very much, to what real love is and what it is not. Many people “love” other people because of themselves, because of something they need, or lack, or crave, or want, and, in reality, it is not about the person they supposedly love, but themselves.

This is the issue of real love; for real love is not about the self who loves, but about the loved, and, to be more accurate, about the loving. It is directional in nature—real love goes outward, and not-real love goes inward, not-real love is about the lover, not the loved.

I think that real and true love is when both people can love going outward and they do not love for themselves, or to fill a gap, or a place or something, or to get something, but simply because they love and cannot do otherwise. People who are controlled by their illusions, “issues,” desires, and assorted baggage, feel as if they cannot help it, but they really can. Real love is not desire.

I think of this topic again while reading A Farewell to Arms, wondering how they could really love each other when they do not even really know each other (let alone themselves), and it made me think about all the love stories where I simply didn’t buy it. It makes me wonder about the complexity of other people’s loves, even though I do think that most people are incapable of real, selfless love; or if they do feel it, they do not know what it is, and do not know what to do with it, do not understand it, cannot understand it, because they are too ego-bound, too self-involved to experience it in a context of truth. They may feel a bit of selfless love, but because they live such illusion-based existences, that love is smothered and appropriated by illusory, selfish love; it is distorted and unable to be expressed truly and honestly, for it is not even really known and understood as it really is, for it cannot be by one who is so lost.

Again: Self precludes love.

.

From my personal notes, 7/12/00

And it does not exist in the way they force it upon your mind. It is a conspiracy, but it is one of ignorance, of pride, of fear. It is self-sustaining, and not run by a group of people, it is not connected to strings controlled by a puppet-master. And this is something too subtle for most people to understand, so they create and attack a ‘straw man’ instead, because that is easier, and is also part of the defense of the system, part of the conditioning as well.

I think that part of my work is to try and understand the system, for how can I really fight against it well if I do not understand it well? I need to understand both the system and reality. Both. It is complex, and difficult, and thankless. It is everything that the system is not, everything that those in the system fear and will fight against. And in this way it is a war, but one must be very careful of this analogy, and not take it too far.

I am a freedom fighter. And, as such, I need to live as that, while not living as a soldier, for that is not the right way. I fight, but I must fight with love, though that sounds contradictory.

I must fight with freedom, and with an open-mind, and, therefore, I must think for myself; things that soldiers are trained not to have and do, which is why I am not a soldier, in the traditional sense of that word.

I must fight with truth, for truth begets truth.

This is so much easier said than done, and yet that is what I have.

The hard thing is that most people are not wholly part of the system. Everyone is a combination of in and out. That is good, but it also makes it very hard, for it is hard to deal with everyone on their level, especially when it is hard to get to know their level without really knowing them.

But, I also know that I can’t chase everyone’s egos. That’s not the right thing. I need to be myself; and the more I am myself, the better I will be able to deal with anyone that comes along in the way that is right for that situation.

This is the use of mass communication, for you put it out there and hope that some people will get it. This is why I want to think globally and act locally, but also think locally and act globally. Both. This is key for me, and what I know I can do.

.

From my personal notes, 7/10/00

It is hard for me to trust most people, because it is like Invasion of the Body Snatchers, or The Matrix, where it is hard to know who is your friend or enemy, or at least who is being ignorantly manipulated by the enemy (‘the system’). Like you often hear in sci-fi: trust no one. This is for good reason, for those who do not follow this are almost assured to be sucked in and held captive in some way.

It is hard, of course, because it is a life of loneliness and isolation. But I do not think that it needs to be. This is one of my biggest challenges. It is a life of being misunderstood, on different levels, and by most people, and so it is a very hard life; or, at least fairly lonely, for whether or not it is ‘hard’ has a lot to do with my own degree of enlightenment. Either way, it is a life that takes a lot of courage to live right.

In a way, I am like those people in The Matrix, part of a resistance, but, at least right now, I am on my own, not even really sure that there are other real resisters out there. I feel that there are, but part of the problem is that the line between resistance and collaborator is often not an easy one to find with many people. And those who want to resist, or know certain things about it, may think they are a resister, but are really not free enough to be.

And so the problem is that it is not black-and-white; it is not easy to find those who are really resisters. Many of those who would resist cannot handle it well, and end up defeated. I think this is widespread.

It is important to always remember that the enemy of your enemy is not necessarily your friend. This is one of the biggest problems with gathering a strong unified resistance, for many of those who feel that your enemy is their enemy are not doing it all for the right reasons, are not doing it with open minds and hearts, with love, but rather with hate, or fear, or envy, or pride, or whatever.

This is why it is very rare. It is very rare to find someone who truly understands the trappings and illusory nature of the ego; for many ‘resisters’ are still resisting with their egos, and that’s still, ultimately, part of the problem.

I need to be strong, because I know that pretty much everyone out there is functioning, consciously or not, to suck me in, though they are not necessarily even trying. It is just part of the programming, part of the conditioning that people believe in. And so they may be sincere, but that does not mean that they are on the right track.

Everything seems to be set up to be against who it is that I am. The intricacies of the ways that people resist the truth, resist people like me, are many. For most, it is some combination of hate, envy, fear, arrogance, weakness, weariness, etc. It is such a complex web.

.

From my personal notes, 7/10/00

I think that I realize that while it is great to hear that someone else believes that you have something to contribute, that that is not enough, that I need to believe it in myself, that I need to believe in myself if I am really to do it, and do it well.

And so I need to figure out how to be me. I need to figure out how to be the well-oiled me, because right now, I am like a car engine with years of deposits that are keeping it from running well and smoothly. I need to figure out how I can run smoothly, for only then can the things come out of me that I know are in there waiting to come out when they are ready.

I need to clear my mind, clear the cobwebs from my mind.

A lot is going on with all this: there is fear, and I know that I need to find the confidence to do it; I need to not be terrified of being alone; I need to figure out how to not let feeling un-safe cripple me, or hold me back; and there is the feeling that this is the time, that this is the time for me to really start this, that I have finally begun to figure out who it is that I am, and how I should go about being that, though it is not all clear to me.

It is not something that fits into the machine of this society, and so I need to figure out how to be me in this society, and yet not get caught up in it in a way that will hold me back any longer.

This will not be easy, for most people are still in “the matrix,” and, as the movie said, many people are so much in it that they will fight to defend it; and that is hard, because who I am is all about fighting against the matrix, of freeing myself from it.

This is not easy, and it is something I feel I have been struggling with my entire life.

I need to clear away the shit that is keeping me from being who I really am, from expressing who I really am in the ways that I feel are right for me.

I know that I need to allow myself to be myself, that I need to allow for the things that will come out of me to come out of me, and that the work needs to be directed towards clearing away the shit in order to allow it. I need to clear the way for the coming of me, and what I have to express, create, and contribute. And that involves the courage necessary to face and fight the fear that holds me back.

It is time for me to no longer be afraid, to no longer be afraid to finally step out there, into the world, as me, come what may. Because I know full-well that if I do not, that I am guaranteeing myself a life of aloneness and incompleteness and unhappiness.

I need to not feel responsible for this kind of thing for anyone else, for that is their responsibility, and not only would I be doing myself, and them, a disservice by taking it upon myself, but it is wholly impossible, anyway, for me to deal with or take responsibility for that which is theirs alone. Wow. Only now have I been able to really see this.

The hard thing in all this is to get down to earth, to bring these general, and almost abstract, concepts down to the real world, to my real life, to the specifics of me and my life, and deal with them as opposed to just recognizing them.

.

From my personal notes, 7/10/00